The Myth of the "Real M Car" (via Jalopnik)

[StealYourFace]

Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD

I understand the financial incentive to seperate their line but not sure money should be the only motive for a company that preaches heritage also. I think what is happening for me and a lot on this forum is we want a more aggressive car and are getting softer ones from bmw.

I agree with you 100%- as I would expect to since you have a sweet picture of your prepped e46, best profile of the 2000s... but us 'enthusiast' on the board (many like myself will probably never buy a brand new anything because we are too pragmatic to pay for the largest chunk of depreciation that comes along with buying a new car) are a very fickle group.

Case in point.. the posts regarding the hopefully upcoming M2. The same people that want a 'raw' M2 are also saying they don't want a rough 4 banger. I personally love the idea of a high strung, light weight 's25' or whatever it might be called over the nose.

I had an hour long debate with my father on the way home from Detroit auto show through southern Ontario (god bless their exceptional roads) about how I think a 525hp, big cam/big displacement Z06 would be "better" (My subjective feeling) than the blown 625hp Z06 that will be released. Let's face it, even talented drivers who respect their abilities and the laws of physics will have more power on tap that they can handle with 625 hp. It's a street car, wtf?! By the way, does anyone remember when the Z06 had like 50 hp more than the already capable standard vette motor....

At the end of the day, except in rare instances of enthusiast groups like our cca 'forcing' bmw to make a stick shift M5 for the US (I wish the same vigor was there for a stick shift, non xi version of the 3er wagon 328 or 335, either way I'd be pleased) we pretty much have to accept what we are given. But that's ok, because modern cars are very good, other than all the forced induction and two pedal setups. Even with that, FI cars are becoming better, more responsive and transparent in their power delivery.

Again, just the observations of somebody too cheap to actually buy a new car, so I guess I really don't have the skin in the game required to critique them lol

[squirrelcognac]

Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD

I understand the financial incentive to seperate their line but not sure money should be the only motive for a company that preaches heritage also. I think what is happening for me and a lot on this forum is we want a more aggressive car and are getting softer ones from bmw.

Agreed. I own a Z4M and consider that an amazing M car. Normally aspirated, instant throttle response, spot on balance, great drivers position and 100% driver feedback. I've driven the new M6, the E90 M3, the X6/5M's, the E46 M3 and one thing I cannot get past is the obviously noticeable turbo lag in the new M's.
M should be instantaneous power when you need it, not 0.5 seconds later...

If you want to turbo an M car to try match your competitions power find a way to do it without the lag...

[///mawana]

Originally Posted by burnsniper

A "Real M Car" is a car designed by the enthusiasts at BMW M that can be (1) driven to track on the weekend, (2) driven competitively at at >8/10ths at the track on the weekend, (3) driven home from the track, and then (4) serve as a comfortable daily driver on the weekdays. Real M cars do this with minimal compromise either at the track or on the road. Every M car, both past and present, fits into this philosophy. This same philosophy makes the 911 and Cayman/Boxster great and desirable cars. Also, I believe this is why we have never seen a true M super car - a M super car would violate the "daily driver" aspect of the M formula.

The older race car derived cars M Cars - the M1, E30 M3, etc. - were race cars that were "tamed for the street." Modern series derived cars are street cars "tuned for the track." Marketing and competitive pressure clearly determine which BMW vehicles get the M treatment. The X5M, X6M and due to their ever increasing size and weight the E93 M3, M5, M6, and M6 GC are clearly selected for M treatment due to marketing - I don't think anyone at BMW M thinks "lets modify an X5, X6, 5, or 6 series because it will make a great track car." However, the resulting cars due fit the "Real M Car" philosophy that I defined above. I am sure that the BMW M engineers are confident that you could drive an X6M comfortably to the track, on the track, and back home without breaking anything. As we know, very few people are going to track an X6M - however that same thing could be said for an M5 or M6.

Perhaps this is the myth of "the myth of the real M car"! There is a real M car in the strictest sense of the original idea behind what the M car was based of. This is what purists allude to when they lament the new direction and what you also loosely defined - what we are seeing now is probably the bastardized and re-bastardized version(s) of the real idea behind M cars. And it's quite understable why this is the case as BMW has to adapt and turn a profit but there is no myth of the real M car. The only 'myth' is the denial by most of us (the new generation) of what a real M car should be per the original idea. BMW is quite aware of what the real M car should be, they just refuse to build it because I doubt if they will even breakeven.

[nachob]

Originally Posted by Z8chP

This is my comment from jalopnik:

"I think as long as the current and future ///M cars are still ahead of the competition in terms of handling and power, or atleast a combination of the two, then they are still true "M" cars.

Complain all you want about them getting bigger and heavier, and losing hydraulic steering. It's all irrelevant. Why? Because EVERY car manufacturer is making cars bigger, heavier, with electric steering, more electronic aids, no manual transmission.

I absolutely cannot stand how people knock on BMW and completely ignore ever other auto maker. Last time I checked MB doesn't make a single manual trans car in the US. Last I checked, most AMG models and all RS models are AWD. Meanwhile ///M is still RWD and producing manuals.

Screw the haters."

I'll also add that bmw still uses very basic analog gauges. (which I love) They also have clearly realized their cars are getting heavy and are obviously going beyond the extra mile to cut weight. The i series being the most obvious.

We aren't looking for the same thing as every other automaker! They are tellings us the are making the Ultimate Driving Machine. Simply doing what everyone else is doing is not the ultimate driving machine.

Also, simply matching horsepower or even having more horsepower does not make a better car. There are many beasts out there that have more power than an M car but handle poorly or provide poor feedback and throttle response. What made BMW and M cars special were exactly those little things you think don't matter. Steering feel and precision is what set them apart for years. Brake modulation was always a high point for BMW. Throttle response was also a high point now they are going with the same stuff as everyone else.. Dull steering feel, all turbo motors with slower throttle response and not a single Normally aspirated M option for the enthusiast. Why can Ford make a N/A Mustang or Subaru and Toyota an N/A FRS/BRZ. Even new Lexus competition has an N/A motor!

You and the majority might not care and this is why BMW and the M brand has gotten to this point.

[burnsniper]

Originally Posted by ///mawana

Perhaps this is the myth of "the myth of the real M car"! There is a real M car in the strictest sense of the original idea behind what the M car was based of. This is what purists allude to when they lament the new direction and what you also loosely defined - what we are seeing now is probably the bastardized and re-bastardized version(s) of the real idea behind M cars. And it's quite understable why this is the case as BMW has to adapt and turn a profit but there is no myth of the real M car. The only 'myth' is the denial by most of us (the new generation) of what a real M car should be per the original idea. BMW is quite aware of what the real M car should be, they just refuse to build it because I doubt if they will even breakeven.

This is further compounded by a growing gap in motorsports between a race car and a street car. The Porsche GT3 (arguably the Viper and Z06 could be included) is arguably the last true street car that is closely related to a race car. The AMLS M3 and DTE M3 share almost nothing in common with the E92 M3 (see Chris Harris's review of the DTE M3). Even the McLaren 12C road car is substantially different than the McLaren 12C GT3. Nobody questions that enthusiast nature of Ferrari - a race car company that started building street cars to finance their racing operations - even though the street cars have traditionally had little in common with their race car counterparts.

Top level motorsports is defined by the driver, on track safety, cost, and aerodynamics. We no longer live in the era where road going 911s, Cobras, FIAT Abarths, and M3s are essentially the same car used on the race track. While there is still some trickle down effect from motorsports to mainline street cars (S65 engine, CCB, etc. are some examples), these items don't define what an M car or sports car in general is supposed to be.

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by bigjae1976

E90...worst cup holders in the history of mankind.

Clearly you've never been in an e39

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by nachob

This is a really great editorial but I think whitewashes somewhat how bad things have gotten. Yes, BMW has finally released an ///M car that is lighter than the previous one, referring to the new M3 and M4 but only because the it was sooooooo heavy in the first place. They put a carbon fiber driveshaft, hood and trunk but load it up with all these non-performance frills that negate all of the weight savings. The offer a special package for Canadian M3 buyers BUT you have to order it loaded to qualify. The final climax is a adding a mandatory video display high up in centerline in the LINE OF SIGHT. Exactly what any REAL enthusiast would want cruising on the autobahn at high speed. At least Porsche has enough sense to put it low near the radio!

This death of ///M as a real enthusiast marque happened slowly and it wasn't just ///M, it happened to BMW in general. They have chosen to follow others instead of educate and lead. Early on BMW models came with central window controls which allowed you to roll your windows down while keeping your left hand on the wheel and if you look, it's in the centerline of the car. Then they followed the trend of every other manufacturer and put them in the door where you have to change hands and look away from centerline to find them. This is not really "driving focused" placement.

The instruments on E46s were a red/orange hue, perfect for night driving similar to submarines and aircraft. They help maintain night vision while you're barreling down the autobahn at night. Now they have video displays and all these distractions and bright color instruments like any other car.

The 1M gave me a burst of hope someone at ///M cared about the direction of the division and the company but that was dashed after seeing so many of them ordered by the US market fully bloated. At least the 1M had some bloat restrictions since you couldn't get sunroof, automatic trans or active suspension. It was more focused than anything in a long time but that was short lived.

The fact is that the only ones to blame are the guys and girls that continue to gleefully buy rolling video arcades.

Like everyone else, by definition of a real ///M car has changed over the years and it is more inclusive. If I see a car that is driving focused, it gets my respect.

To me, stripped M3 or even a lowly 128i 6mt with no sunroof, manual seats and ///M Sport Package is MORE of a real M car to me than a fully loaded ///Anything.

I 100% agree with everything said here.

The e82 128i was the last great BMW made. With disa/headers/tune, 1M subframe bushings, and light weight wheels/tires (taking the car to 3100 lb curb weight, ~300 hp, factory non turbo car reliability), it was truly outstanding. Sadly somehow nobody noticed.

I think what this article is really missing is... we (well, at least I) didn't come to M because I want an M. I want:
-high build quality
-high revving, NA engine
-rwd
-manual (not added as an afterthought)
-reasonable weight for the practicality
-communicative steering
-visceral driving experience

The F8X will be rwd, which is nice, but I bet next gen we get awd. It's amiable in 6mt, but every time they do manual lately it's an after thought. The only place the car is exceptional (IMO) is weight for the practicality. Even there, they did it the aftermarket way instead of the OE way (alu chassis, ala e60 M5), so there won't be much in the way of making it lighter aftermarket.

So, yeah... In 2002, I wanted to own every product that BMW made. In 2014 I want to own every product BMW made in 2002. Purchased two new M3s in my lifetime (performance center delivery on both), and don't see myself ever buying a new BMW again.

What's more upsetting, though, is there isn't really a replacement for what BMW used to be.

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by FogCityM3

Sticking F-1 (McLaren F1) and Formula 1 engine technology in the S85 and S65 (and to certain extent E46 M3) represented to me the pinnacle of excitement and uniqueness. Comparable engines with similar power characteristics/curves were only available in much more exotic cars.

What?

The McLaren F1 engine is euro e36 M3 engine tech. It shares heads, cams, vanos, pistons, rods, and valves with the e36 M3 euro engines.

The S54 is an evolution/improvement of the euro e36 M3 engine, so if anything it has more in common with it than the S65 and S85.

The S65 and S85 have no parts in common with the McLaren F1 engine and really had nothing in common with it other than a similar design philosophy (high rev high specific output).

[jippii ensio]

We don't want real M cars.
M = Motorsport is no good for streets.

The current M series cars are great - comfortable and come with A/C and radio. I like A/C a lot.

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by jippii ensio

We don't want real M cars.
M = Motorsport is no good for streets.

The current M series cars are great - comfortable and come with A/C and radio. I like A/C a lot.

Only M cars I can think of that were offered without radio/AC (though both had them as options) are the CSL and GTS.-- fairly modern

[Brian_VACsales]

Originally Posted by StealYourFace

I think a 525hp, big cam/big displacement Z06 would be "better" (My subjective feeling) than the blown 625hp Z06 that will be released.

It is better.

[Edward]

Nothing worse than someone saying "_______ was the last true M car."

Hipsters should stick to Priuses and knitting.

[grantmax]

If any car was the "last" of the "real" "m cars", it is ours.

N/A ftw. 1M, M5/6 (F10), and even the X5/6M are all turbo sellouts.

Then again... Skyline is FI til they die. So maybe the M Division should start learning from them.

[duk]

To me an M car is about the total package not just one or two specific areas like engine or handling.

M car has always been about having a car you can take to track and also pick up groceries and does both really really well. Other M Sport or IS models can do that as well but not quiet as well.

I don't mind them doing M Sport or other models at all, they need more $ so they can give us the good stuff we want.

[Kayani_1]

Nice read

[bigjae1976]

Originally Posted by Matski

The article does overlook a couple of more recent M exploits. Such as the E46 M3 GTR, which would have been a full on homologation special had it come to fruition, the E90 320Si was also released to homologate that engine for use in the WTCC. More recently the M3 GTS, which homologated the 4.4l engine for use in the E92 and Z4 GT programs.

I will not state this is as a fact...but I saw some evidence that the S65B40 is pretty close to the P60B40 in more ways than the displacement. While you bring this up...I'd be interested to see if this is true.

Originally Posted by Obioban

Clearly you've never been in an e39

E90 M3...Starbucks medium coffee (WTF is a grande?)...speed bump resulting in copious amounts of dried sticky coffee in your center console and carpet. That might change your mind

Originally Posted by Richbot

Once again, the S85 and S65 were the aberrations. Every other M engine even the vaunted s14 and s38 has been a derivative of a regular production power plant, some more heavily modified than others

Agreed. I don't get why everyone drools over the E30 M3. Its f'ing slow and it has a 4 cyl which is a 6 cyl with 2 cylinders lopped off. Its a cool looking car...I'll take my E46 M3 any day of the week.

[Obioban]

You really need to take the e30 M3 on a hard drive on a back road to understand it. It's just... the best handling car I've ever driven. Absolutely agreed that it's not particularly fast in the slightest, but as a driving experience it's pretty unrivaled. The S14 is low on power, but being able to constantly floor it instead of constantly holding back has it's own charm.

e39 cup holders can ONLY hold a red bull can, and only if you don't accelerate, brake, or turn. They're in a class of their own, imo

[DuPlessisLouis]

I may be wrong, but hasn't M always been more about the chassis than the engine? Sure, the engines may not be NA today, but when was the last time you drove a "bad handling" BMW? I believe that's something that has been one of the main characteristics of a BMW, especially a M BMW, regardless of the engine.

Just like a lot of other automakers, BMW had to shift its standards and question its roots, to stay in competition with the rest of the crowd. BMW and M may not be "pure" anymore, but the same goes for other automakers. There are even rumours that the successor to the 458 Italia will sport a 6-cyclinder FI engine, to comply with regulations. Look at F1 cars - their engines might have "downgraded" from those glorious sounding V10's, but it doesn't hinder the sport's excitement or how we look at F1 cars.

I think we all should be grateful that a BMW is still mainly a RWD car and that a BMW generally feels better to drive than a lot of other cars. That is, until they release the "Active Tourer"...

[schoy]

Originally Posted by nachob

We aren't looking for the same thing as every other automaker! They are tellings us the are making the Ultimate Driving Machine. Simply doing what everyone else is doing is not the ultimate driving machine.

You do know that "UDM" is just a marketing slogan, right? Or did you really believe that BMW is really making (or was at any time trying to make) the "Ultimate Driving Machine"? And what does that even mean (as it probably means something different to each and every person)?

Here's an intriguing thought: Perhaps this whole time, for the last 30 odd years, the M designation was simply a marketing tool from the very start, and that we "enthusiasts" bought the advertised philosophy -- the story -- hook, line and sinker. That this whole time, BMW used us, the enthusiasts, to market their product for them, to trumpet the greatness of the M badge to the unsophisticated car-buying public. And after we did such a fantastic job, BMW decided that we weren't needed anymore, that our opinions no longer mattered (since we represent a very small percentage of actual M car purchasers), since the M designation could now sell itself (X5M, X6M, etc.) and that the so-called M mythology was NOT in fact created by BMW, but actually by us, all these years spoon-fed by those "interviews"/"talks"/"meetings" with M division execs in the early years touting an idealized M vision that they knew would captivate us. Wouldn't that be something? I'm not a conspiracy theorist by any stretch of the imagination, but this make for an interesting marketing thesis ...

[US///M3]

The myth died with the E30 M3 that came with A/C, leather seats, high fi radio, heated seats, powered moonroof,windows, headlights wipers and washers etc..

Not really a race car. Hahaha

[DuPlessisLouis]

Originally Posted by US///M3

The myth died with the E30 M3 that came with A/C, leather seats, high fi radio, heated seats, powered moonroof,windows, headlights wipers and washers etc..

Not really a race car. Hahaha

I was hoping for the M235i Racing to be a stripped down, raw and aggressive track car, but then they had to go and put in A/C and keep the display on the dashboard. Yes, it's probably cheaper for them to keep it like that for production purposes, but is it really needed? Are you going to fine tune your A/C temperature while flying around the track?

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by DuPlessisLouis

I may be wrong, but hasn't M always been more about the chassis than the engine? Sure, the engines may not be NA today, but when was the last time you drove a "bad handling" BMW? I believe that's something that has been one of the main characteristics of a BMW, especially a M BMW, regardless of the engine.

Just like a lot of other automakers, BMW had to shift its standards and question its roots, to stay in competition with the rest of the crowd. BMW and M may not be "pure" anymore, but the same goes for other automakers. There are even rumours that the successor to the 458 Italia will sport a 6-cyclinder FI engine, to comply with regulations. Look at F1 cars - their engines might have "downgraded" from those glorious sounding V10's, but it doesn't hinder the sport's excitement or how we look at F1 cars.

I think we all should be grateful that a BMW is still mainly a RWD car and that a BMW generally feels better to drive than a lot of other cars. That is, until they release the "Active Tourer"...

Eh, I think every BMW made these days is pretty boring. Go drive ANY spec e28/e34/e39 5 series or e30/e36/e46 3 series-- they ALL have good handling/communicative steering/fun dynamics. Then drive any spec f10 5 series. Feels like a buick-- isolated chassis, no steering feel, poor throttle response.

So, agreed that chassis is more important than the engine. But, disagree that that disproves BMW has lost its way.